The same applies to a wing in the normal position. If you go to AskaMathematician.com, and ask him
this question, you are treated like an idiot. He tells you,
Using the engines we have today (jets and whatnot) you could fly a brick, so long as the nose is pointed up.
I take issue with the above from the first link.
This, although sounding flippant, is the truth, you cannot use an aircraft flying upside down as evidence that there is a magical lift phenomena at work.
A wing does not need to produce any lift force when thrust is abundant enough, if anything the wing is nothing more than a guide vane, and a poor one in that scenario.
Even a brick with enough thrust will fly
You see that this implies angle of attack is what is important. He wants you to think that,
because all the old answers have fallen apart. But if you aren't an idiot, you remember watching planes
take off. Planes taking off have no necessary angle of attack.
The picture is a commercial airliner sat static on a runway. I believe this person thinks that angle of attack refers to the FUSELAGE not the WING
Imagine if a wing on a plane did not have a positive angle of attack
